FX IMPACT - RONIN001

Jump to latest Follow Reply
R

Ronin001

Member
May 26, 2015
388
27
KY, United States
First I would like to say I waited a long time to get this in my hands and almost had to wait 2 more months but here I am with this marvel of a rifle in my hands!

First for you folks out there this is the first thing I checked and please check your rifle before you put to much money in a mount for your nice new rifle.

***PICATTINY RAIL / or maybe not quite not

My $200+ LaRue Picattiny scope mount does not fit. What that tells me is the grooves are too narrow and a tell tell sign of a Weaver rail.

I measure the groove at .199-.190"

piccatinny rail groove is .206"
Weaver rail groove is .180"

For generic weaver/piccattiny set up will work most likely but due to the slightly narrow groove I don't recommend a high end Piccatinny mount it will not fit.
 
They are not removable. Here is a pic of what I have
imagepng
 
Upvote 0
You just need a mark so you can put it in the same place each time. There are some other options that are considerably less expensive: http://www.pyramydair.com/a/Accessories/Mounts_bases_rings_levels_and_scope_stops/1_piece_mounts/Picatinny_Weaver/30mm_rings/58 As awesome as the LaRue mounts are I think they are overkill for a PCP. I have two sets of these for my RAW HM1000x on two scopes that I switch back and forth and have had no problem with repeatability: http://www.pyramydair.com/s/a/UTG_Max_Strength_30mm_Rings_Medium_Weaver_Picatinny/4921
 
Upvote 0
I fixed or attempted to fix the groove problem by using 3 quarters and rolling them back and forth to widen them a hair. Next problem LaRue mount locking mechanism is not allowing the mount to come down. So something is just not right with the rail. I use this mount on different AR platforms all the time and never had this issue.

Like I said generic Weaver/Picatinny rings/mounts will work just fine my point was be aware if you have a true Picatinny mount such as particular with the "LaRue" you may run into issues.

LaRue mount



 
Upvote 0
"30cal"You just need a mark so you can put it in the same place each time. There are some other options that are considerably less expensive: http://www.pyramydair.com/a/Accessories/Mounts_bases_rings_levels_and_scope_stops/1_piece_mounts/Picatinny_Weaver/30mm_rings/58 As awesome as the LaRue mounts are I think they are overkill for a PCP. I have two sets of these for my RAW HM1000x on two scopes that I switch back and forth and have had no problem with repeatability: http://www.pyramydair.com/s/a/UTG_Max_Strength_30mm_Rings_Medium_Weaver_Picatinny/4921
Click to expand...
Its not an over kill for a 34mm tube scope ($$$) that gets rotated around to more than one brand of air rifle and my AR rifles.

At the time when I was looking for a 34mm scope mount the cheapest things I could find on generic mount was a Burris 34mm and they were out of stock for a couple month and still cost $130 hence the LaRue.
 
Upvote 0
Little problem with scopes at the moment considering two of my better scopes both of have LaRue mounts on them. ugh... On hold with shooting until I figure out what I need and want to do with the scope situation.


edit---
Burris AR-PEPR scope mount will not work for this rail either.



Fortunate or Unfortunate depending how you look at it a work around is to put on a generic piccatinny riser that has no "recoil lugs or guides" on it to allow Picatinny mounts with recoil lugs to be used. http://www.amazon.com/UTG-Profile-Riser-Mount-slots/dp/B003LT3ISI/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&qid=1449199674&sr=8-4&keywords=picatinny+riser
 
Upvote 0
I believe weaver and picatinny is slightly different. Almost the same, but not quite.

Here goes:

The profile of the two systems is virtually identical. Depending on the quality of the machining done by the manufacturer, the two systems should be indistinguishable from the profile. The key difference lies in the placement of the recoil grooves and with width of the grooves. MIL-STD-1913 (Picatinny) grooves are .206” wide and have a center-to-center width of .394”. The placement of these grooves has to be consistent in order for it to be a true “Picatinny” MIL-STD system. Weaver systems have a .180” width of recoil groove and are not necessarily consistent in a center-to-center measurement from one groove to the next. In many instances, a Weaver system has a specific application that it is machined for, so interchangeability is not necessarily an issue. A MIL-STD-1913 system must adhere to the specifications listed above in order for it to be considered MIL-STD, since the military desires uniformity in the recoil grooves to allow for different systems to be mounted on the weapon with no concern for compatibility.
 
Upvote 0
To me picatinny to weaver is like 357 to 9mm... They are just not the same thing and a lot of people just don't know the difference or think those little differences don't matter but they do. I have been asking for months on this particular subject with the Impact and well I have answered it and unfortunately for me the Impact rail is NOT a "Picatinny Rail System" maybe as a generic term as "Weaver/Picatinny rail 


For the most part as general rule of thumb I follow:
"Weaver will fit to a Picatinny but a Picatinny will not fit to Weaver"
 
Upvote 0
"Ronin001"Burris AR-PEPR scope mount will not work for this rail either.
Click to expand...
FX reads this forum. I am confident they will see this, and I agree that your concerns are something they should strongly consider. They went out of their way to create a modular platform with the gun - allowing quick swapping of barrels and even (AR-compatible) grips. I think they would want a rail that is standardized. Firearms users are the "next frontier" of the airgun business (Airforce has been targeting them in magazine ads for years). Making a gun compatible with all of their existing gear would be vital in the effort to lure them over to air power.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Resources
Menu